Bruce Cameron

Name

Year

Credit

credited As

The holiday season has arrived, which means Christmas movies have started to play on TV constantly. But what if you're in the mood for watching something a little less jolly? These movies are set during the holidays, but their plots don't have much to do with the holidays at all. With no Santa, no elves, and no reindeer, you can still celebrate the season without feeling overwhelmed by Christmas cheer.
1. Love Actually
zebrange.tumblr.com
The British rom-com featuring interconnecting love stories takes place during the days leading up to Christmas. However, the holidays are an overarching theme that ties the stories together, rather than the main focus.
2. Home Alone
auguustraee.tumblr.com
While Kevin (Macaulay Culkin) gets left behind by his family during the holidays, this movie is mostly about convincing little kids they can stop a burglar with a few well-placed traps.
3. It’s a Wonderful Life
stagebuddy.tumblr.com
One of the most iconic Christmas movies isn’t really about Christmas? Yep. The holiday classic is about the life of George Bailey (Jimmy Stewart), and doesn’t really involve Christmas until the very end.
4. Die Hard
gif-able.tumblr.com
Those who aren’t into sentimental movies can watch Bruce Willis shooting people to get into the holiday spirit.
5. The Holiday
theflavourofyourlips.tumblr.com
Yes, the word “holiday” is in the title, but the movie is really about two women (Cameron Diaz and Kate Winslet) who take a much-needed vacation. They swap houses to get away from their normal lives, and both end up finding love.
6. While You Were Sleeping
lucy-moderatz.tumblr.com
Sandra Bullock is mistaken for a stranger’s fiancée and ends up spending the holidays with his family. The holidays simply provide a backdrop for this cute romantic comedy.
7. Iron Man 3
GIPHY
This summer blockbuster surprisingly takes places over Christmas. But with so much action going on, there isn’t much room for holiday cheer.
8. Rent
prouvaire.tk
“December 24, 9 PM, Eastern Standard Time.” Fans of the Broadway musical-turned-film will recognize these words, which start the story of a year in the life of a group of New Yorkers that begins and ends on Christmas Eve.
Follow @hollywood_com
//
Follow @mary_oates
//

Justin Bieber joined the stars of the Pittsburgh Steelers for a Bible study session in New Jersey on Saturday night (08Nov14). The pop star was an unexpected guest for the National Football League team's pre-game religious get together before the players' Sunday (09Nov14) game against the New York Jets.
Steelers quarterback Bruce Gradkowski and his teammates Cameron Heyward and Arthur Moats posted photos of themselves posing with the Baby singer, who showed his support by wearing a Steelers hat.
But neither the prayer session nor Bieber brought the team much luck - they were beaten 20-13 by the Jets at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey.

Singer Courtney Love is courting controversy once again after suggesting Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band do not "belong" in rock and roll, days after they were inducted into the industry's Hall of Fame museum. The Boss paid tribute to his longtime backing band and performed with the musicians as they were honoured at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame gala in New York last week (10Apr14), but in a new YouTube.com video, Kurt Cobain's widow claims they do not fit into the genre.
Love also admits she isn't a big Springsteen fan and only liked the rocker's 1982 album Nebraska, a series of demo songs he recorded without the E Street Band. In the video, part of her Love on Love online segments in which she offers up her take on a variety of topics, she says, "I like Nebraska. And whenever I say that to a Springsteen person (fan), they look at me funny."
She continues, "With Springsteen, I just... I really like him. He's a nice guy. Cameron Crowe, an old, very dear friend of mine, took me to the Staples Center (in Los Angeles) for a three-night gig, and I could only last an hour and a half in a three-and-a-half hour show with the Boss." But Love's main problem with Springsteen's music appears to lie with the work of the E Street Band.
She adds, "My Springsteen problem is just that saxophones don't belong in rock 'n' roll. They just don't belong." The footage then cuts to a photo of Springsteen with late E Street Band saxophonist Clarence Clemons, who died in 2011. Love was in attendance at the Hall of Fame event to mark the induction of Cobain and his Nirvana bandmates, Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic. KISS, Peter Gabriel and Hall &amp; Oates were also among the Class of 2014.

DreamWorks
For the bulk of every Rocky and Bullwinkle episode, moose and squirrel would engage in high concept escapades that satirized geopolitics, contemporary cinema, and the very fabrics of the human condition. With all of that to work with, there's no excuse for why the pair and their Soviet nemeses haven't gotten a decent movie adaptation. But the ingenious Mr. Peabody and his faithful boy Sherman are another story, intercut between Rocky and Bullwinkle segments to teach kids brief history lessons and toss in a nearly lethal dose of puns. Their stories and relationship were much simpler, which means that bringing their shtick to the big screen would entail a lot more invention — always risky when you're dealing with precious material.
For the most part, Mr. Peabody &amp; Sherman handles the regeneration of its heroes aptly, allowing for emotionally substance in their unique father-son relationship and all the difficulties inherent therein. The story is no subtle metaphor for the difficulties surrounding gay adoption, with society decreeing that a dog, no matter how hyper-intelligent, cannot be a suitable father. The central plot has Peabody hosting a party for a disapproving child services agent and the parents of a young girl with whom 7-year-old Sherman had a schoolyard spat, all in order to prove himself a suitable dad. Of course, the WABAC comes into play when the tots take it for a spin, forcing Peabody to rush to their rescue.
Getting down to personals, we also see the left brain-heavy Peabody struggle with being father Sherman deserves. The bulk of the emotional marks are hit as we learn just how much Peabody cares for Sherman, and just how hard it has been to accept that his only family is growing up and changing.
DreamWorks
But more successful than the new is the film's handling of the old — the material that Peabody and Sherman purists will adore. They travel back in time via the WABAC Machine to Ancient Egypt, the Renaissance, and the Trojan War, and 18th Century France, explaining the cultural backdrop and historical significance of the settings and characters they happen upon, all with that irreverent (but no longer racist) flare that the old cartoons enjoyed. And oh... the puns.
Mr. Peabody &amp; Sherman is a f**king treasure trove of some of the most amazingly bad puns in recent cinema. This effort alone will leave you in awe.
The film does unravel in its final act, bringing the science-fiction of time travel a little too close to the forefront and dropping the ball on a good deal of its emotional groundwork. What seemed to be substantial building blocks do not pay off in the way we might, as scholars of animated family cinema, have anticipated, leaving the movie with an unfinished feeling.
But all in all, it's a bright, compassionate, reasonably educational, and occasionally funny if not altogether worthy tribute to an old favorite. And since we don't have our own WABAC machine to return to a time of regularly scheduled Peabody and Sherman cartoons, this will do okay for now.
If nothing else, it's worth your time for the puns.
3/5
Follow @Michael Arbeiter
//
| Follow @Hollywood_com
//

Lions Gate via Everett Collection
When we last left our heroes, they had conquered all opponents in the 74th Annual Hunger Games, returned home to their newly refurbished living quarters in District 12, and fallen haplessly to the cannibalism of PTSD. And now we're back! Hitching our wagons once again to laconic Katniss Everdeen and her sweet-natured, just-for-the-camera boyfriend Peeta Mellark as they gear up for a second go at the Capitol's killing fields.
But hold your horses — there's a good hour and a half before we step back into the arena. However, the time spent with Katniss and Peeta before the announcement that they'll be competing again for the ceremonial Quarter Quell does not drag. In fact, it's got some of the film franchise's most interesting commentary about celebrity, reality television, and the media so far, well outweighing the merit of The Hunger Games' satire on the subject matter by having Katniss struggle with her responsibilities as Panem's idol. Does she abide by the command of status quo, delighting in the public's applause for her and keeping them complacently saturated with her smiles and curtsies? Or does Katniss hold three fingers high in opposition to the machine into which she has been thrown? It's a quarrel that the real Jennifer Lawrence would handle with a castigation of the media and a joke about sandwiches, or something... but her stakes are, admittedly, much lower. Harvey Weinstein isn't threatening to kill her secret boyfriend.
Through this chapter, Katniss also grapples with a more personal warfare: her devotion to Gale (despite her inability to commit to the idea of love) and her family, her complicated, moralistic affection for Peeta, her remorse over losing Rue, and her agonizing desire to flee the eye of the public and the Capitol. Oftentimes, Katniss' depression and guilty conscience transcends the bounds of sappy. Her soap opera scenes with a soot-covered Gale really push the limits, saved if only by the undeniable grace and charisma of star Lawrence at every step along the way of this film. So it's sappy, but never too sappy.
In fact, Catching Fire is a masterpiece of pushing limits as far as they'll extend before the point of diminishing returns. Director Francis Lawrence maintains an ambiance that lends to emotional investment but never imposes too much realism as to drip into territories of grit. All of Catching Fire lives in a dreamlike state, a stark contrast to Hunger Games' guttural, grimacing quality that robbed it of the life force Suzanne Collins pumped into her first novel.
Once we get to the thunderdome, our engines are effectively revved for the "fun part." Katniss, Peeta, and their array of allies and enemies traverse a nightmare course that seems perfectly suited for a videogame spin-off. At this point, we've spent just enough time with the secondary characters to grow a bit fond of them — deliberately obnoxious Finnick, jarringly provocative Johanna, offbeat geeks Beedee and Wiress — but not quite enough to dissolve the mystery surrounding any of them or their true intentions (which become more and more enigmatic as the film progresses). We only need adhere to Katniss and Peeta once tossed in the pit of doom that is the 75th Hunger Games arena, but finding real characters in the other tributes makes for a far more fun round of extreme manhunt.
But Catching Fire doesn't vie for anything particularly grand. It entertains and engages, having fun with and anchoring weight to its characters and circumstances, but stays within the expected confines of what a Hunger Games movie can be. It's a good one, but without shooting for succinctly interesting or surprising work with Katniss and her relationships or taking a stab at anything but the obvious in terms of sending up the militant tyrannical autocracy, it never even closes in on the possibility of being a great one.
3.5/5
Follow @Michael Arbeiter
//
| Follow @Hollywood_com
//

Long before the days when computers could bring any conceivable image to life on the big screen, we had Ray Harryhausen: a visual effects pioneer who championed the realization of breathtaking scenes, creatures, and worlds in the early days of Hollywood. The Ray and Diana Harryhausen Foundation shared the sad news on Tuesday that the cinematic great has passed away at the age of 92 for unspecified, leaving behind wife (and the organization's fellow namesake) Diana Livingstone Bruce, and a legion of grateful film buffs who have devoured his work for decades.
In the business since the 1940s, Harryhausen has contributed to some of the greatest, most important exploits in film history, most notably science fiction and fantasy. As a visual effects artist and technician, Harryhausen breathed life into greats like Mighty Joe Young, It Came from beneath the Sea, 20 Million Miles to Earth, and Mysterious Island. He went on to explore new creative ventures as a producer, crafting Jason and the Argonauts and Clash of the Titans later in his career.
Having assisted Oscar-winning special effects artists like King Kong animator Willis O'Brien, Harryhausen eventually received his own honor from the Academy. In 1992, the animator won the Gordon E. Sawyer Award for a career of technological contributions.
Along with physical prizes, blockbuster filmmakers like Peter Jackson, Geroge Lucas, Tim Burton, James Cameron, and Steven Spielberg have named Harryhausen as a major influence. Lucas as said that, 'Without Ray Harryhausen, there would likely have been no Star Wars."
Harryhausen's work on the big screen charted the course for today's vast cosmos of animation, CGI, and motion capture technology. Film has the legendary artist to thank for expanding the very idea of possibility.
More: Hollywood Pays Respect to Stan WinstonFX Master Dennis Muren: 'Special Effects Aren't Special Anymore'Inside the Art of Stop-Motion
From Our Partners:What Happened to 33 Child Stars (Celebuzz)40 Most Revealing See-Through Red Carpet Looks (Vh1)

Director Michael Bay has offered fans an apology for his critically-ravaged disaster movie Armageddon, insisting he would re-shoot the blockbuster if he was given the chance. The movie, starring Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck, was the biggest grossing release of 1998, raking in over $553 million (£345 million) at the global box office.
However, critics hated Armageddon, and now Bay admits the whole project was rushed and marred by a series of problems during production.
He says, "I will apologise for Armageddon, because we had to do the whole movie in 16 weeks. It was a massive undertaking.
"That was not fair to the movie. I would redo the entire third act if I could. But the studio literally took the movie away from us. It was terrible. My visual effects supervisor had a nervous breakdown, so I had to be in charge of that. I called (fellow director) James Cameron and asked, 'What do you do when you're doing all the effects yourself?' But the movie did fine."

It's hard to define, let alone predict or try and control, what makes a "cult movie." A good few directors have a knack for the construction of the rare, beloved entity — Don Coscarelli, the man who has delivered the Phantasm series, Beastmaster, and the more recent triumph Bubba Ho-Tep, certainly seems to have the secret formula on file. Coscarelli's latest cinematic venture, one
with no deficit of the weird in which he has stuffed each of his previous films, is John Dies at the End.
As a screen adaptation of the horror comedy novel by David Wong, Coscarelli's odd vision of the even odder story might well vie for a cult status of its own. And whether the denotation pertains to his movies or otherwise, Coscarelli admits an unbridled fondness for the growth of the phenomenon that is a cult movie, and for the people who celebrate them so passionately. In our below interview with Coscarelli, the filmmaker discusses his latest unusual project, the challenges in transforming such peculiar material to screen, and what he sees in the future of cult movies in general.
The idea of “stranger” movies is clearly not anything new to you. Is that what drew you to this? Knowing the nature of the book and how bizarre and offbeat it was?
Absolutely. I’m a great fan of things that are different. This book came to be, basically, in an e-mail from Amazon.com. I read this zombie fiction book, and it said, “If you like this zombie fiction book, you’ll love John Dies at the End. That they’re able to actually, using their algorithms, figure out what people like... So I guess they knew what I liked and sent me that book. I always had an interest in “What is reality?” And I think I have a good sense of humor, and the film and the book have a pretty wild and wacky sense of humor.
When you were turning this book into a movie, and you had all this strange stuff to draw from, was there anything that you felt like you couldn’t put in? Anything that was too weird? Maybe you had pushback, or just didn’t think it would be accessible?
Oh yeah. There were a number of items in there that didn’t work. Some of them had to do with scale. There were ideas that would have really challenged James Cameron to pull off — requiring huge and epic effects, and what have you. So those were not possible. There were a few tonal things that were maybe a little too out there for a movie. They had scatological things and references that just got way too weird, that I took out. Generally, I stayed as true as I could to the book, because I thought it was brilliant. And I thought that this writer, David Wong in particular, definitely had a feel and a voice for his generation.
Speaking of David Wong’s voice, when you do adapt a book to a movie — you said you stayed pretty faithful, but I’m sure you want to inject your own voice. Especially with a story where the character is actually named after the author, is there influence to stray toward his voice as opposed to your own? Or did you find that the two melded well?
I think just by the nature of making a movie — screenwriting and directing and editing —my voice and my tastes come through loud and clear, just by doing those things. I had a good experience with the other adaptation that I did, Bubba Ho Tep. With that one, I treated the author’s work almost like the Bible, in that if we ever had a question, I’d come back to the source novel. If you’re going to embark on the insanely huge amount of work involved in making a movie like this, you’ve got to step into it what’s phased in the source material. I think it would be kind of odd to take it and only use a few different pieces of it.
What about visually? There’s a lot of room, when you’re turning something literary into a visual medium, for your own interpretation. How did you decide what the monsters and creatures would look like? Were there ideas that you had to scrap there?
Certainly, form follows function. I was always grasping around at times, trying to figure out how we would realize some of these effects. Because it was so ambitious. One of the breakthroughs was the major monster in the movie that we refer to as the “meat monster.” And for a while, I thought that the only way I could pull something like that off was digitally. But I was working with a really talented illustrator, and one of his drawings came back. And for the first time, I could see that it could be done as a man in a suit. And that was so much more comfortable for me to be able to have something tangible that the actors could really work with. Luckily, having been around the horror block a few times — I’m friends with a number of different effects companies. Robert Kurtzman, who is the “K” of K.N.B. Effects, volunteered to come on, and just did us a favor. He created this masterwork of a suit for the guy to wear. This piece is really a work of art. So, we were able to shoot it without having to rely on digital. In terms of the style, I was trying to go outrageous with some of these things, but also trying to keep the world relatively realistic.
Considering the presence of ghost doors and gigantic spiders.
Yes! [Laughs]You did mention Bubba Ho-Tep, and just thinking back on the Phantasms and Beastmaster, and all the movies that you’ve made that have been strange in different ways through the ‘70s and ‘80s, do you think there’s a different attitude now on strange, niche movies?
Oh yes. There’s no question that movies that movies that have resonance with audiences, cult movies if you will, that they now play forever and ever. With DVD and Internet, everyone can have them and watch them whenever. When I was watching movies before I made movies, you’d have to go to revival houses to see things. It’s fantastic. It’s also interesting that folks develop an affinity for particular movies. I don’t know how, in advance, one can ever cause that to happen, really. To develop that cult audience is kind of a magical thing.
Yeah. It can’t be forced, for sure.
No. And the weird thing is, having made a couple of what are called “cult movies” … some people use it in a pejorative sense, almost looking down a cult movie, but I’m so honored. Because in my mind, when I’m looking at a cult, I’m thinking that cult equals passion. If people really have passion for your work, what’s not to like about that?
What do you think about the future of cult movies in general? In what direction do you think the attitude on that is heading?
I think that there’s no question, with the rise of the Internet — I’ve done some reading about it — there’s a strange form of tribalism, where people in their own “tribes” can connect through the Internet, making it so much easier to follow something passionately. You can find the likeminded souls through various social media, on the web and etcetera. So, I think that the modern age, the Internet-driven age, is ripe for cult artworks of all different kinds. A celebration of them. It’s so much easier now.
And your attitude is, this is a great thing?
I think so! I think it’s good. People can really follow their passions, and find likeminded souls to discuss, and possibly marry. [Laughs] I think it’s a good thing.So cult movies are kind of like matchmakers?
Yeah, in a weird way! There’s no question that the people that love certain movies love to find people who share their passions.
[The final exchange involves a major spoiler about the conclusion about John Dies at the End.]
Maybe this is looking at it in the most literal or the most surface value sense, but one can argue that John does not die in the end. I’m just curious about your attitude on presenting a movie with that title, where it doesn’t necessarily pay off in the literal way.
I learned early on that David Wong had created a rabid fan base — back when he was publishing the book free online, before he even got any kind of a publisher, that everyone was embracing his title and his book. Which is obviously similar to what the film is. The way I qualify it or justify it is, he sort of dies in the beginning, and he dies in the middle. So, he does die, maybe it’s not at the end. And then other people feel that he does die at the end, if you interpret it correctly.
Right. That’s why I say only “literally.” I’m sure there are plenty of interpretations that went over my head.
Agreed. I think I can say that there’s not any blowback from angry fans that he didn’t die. [Laughs] So, I think we’re okay there.
John Dies at the End reaches theaters on Jan. 25. You can watch it now on iTunes, Amazon.com, and VOD.
[Photo Credit: M3 Alliance]
More:
Naomi Watts and Robin Wright Sleeping with Each Other's Sons Is as Creepy as It Sounds
Daniel Radcliffe Proves Himself a Star in Sundance's 'Kill Your Darlings'
'RED 2': Helen Mirren Wants to Pop a Cap in Bruce Willis'... Well, You Know — TRAILER
You Might Also Like:
100 Hottest Women of the Century: Do You Agree?
9 Most Insane Celebrity Baby Bumps

Robert Zemeckis is a blockbuster director at heart. Action has never been an issue for the man behind Back to the Future. When he puts aside the high concept adventures for emotional human stories — think Forrest Gump or Cast Away — he still goes big. His latest Flight continues the trend revolving the story of one man's fight with alcoholism around a terrifying plane crash. Zemeckis expertly crafts his roaring centerpiece and while he finds an agile performer in Denzel Washington the hour-and-a-half of Flight after the shocking moment can't sustain the power. The "big" works. The intimate drowns.
Washington stars as Whip Whitaker a reckless airline pilot who balances his days flying jumbo jets with picking up women snorting lines of cocaine and drinking himself to sleep. Although drunk for the flight that will change his life forever that's not the reason the plane goes down — in fact it may be the reason he thinks up his savvy landing solution in the first place. Writer John Gatins follows Whitaker into the aftermath madness: an investigation of what really happened during the flight Whitaker's battle to cap his addictions and budding relationships that if nurtured could save his life.
Zemeckis tops his own plane crash in Cast Away with the heart-pounding tailspin sequence (if you've ever been scared of flying before Flight will push into phobia territory). In the few scenes after the literal destruction Washington is able to convey an equal amount of power in the moments of mental destruction. Whitaker is obviously crushed by the events the bottle silently calling for him in every down moment. Flight strives for that level of introspection throughout eventually pairing Washington with equally distraught junkie Nicole (Kelly Reilly). Their relationship is barely fleshed out with the script time and time again resorting to obvious over-the-top depictions of substance abuse (a la Nic Cage's Leaving Las Vegas) and the bickering that follows. Washington's Whitaker hits is lowest point early sitting there until the climax of the film.
Sharing screentime with the intimate tale is the surprisingly comical attempt by the pilot's airline union buddy (Bruce Greenwood) and the company lawyer (Don Cheadle) to get Whitaker into shape. Prepping him for inquisitions looking into evidence from the wreckage and calling upon Whitaker's dealer Harling (John Goodman) to jump start their "hero" when the time is right the two men do everything they can to keep any blame being placed upon Whitaker by the National Transportation Safety Board investigators. The thread doesn't feel relevant to Whitaker's plight and in turn feels like unnecessary baggage that pads the runtime.
Everything in Fight shoots for the skies — and on purpose. The music is constantly swelling the photography glossy and unnatural and rarely do we breach Washington's wild exterior for a sense of what Whitaker's really grappling with. For Zemeckis Flight is still a spectacle film with Washington's ability to emote as the magical special effect. Instead of using it sparingly he once again goes big. Too big.
="font-style:>

It was the trickle of pee heard around the world. Cannes attendees were aghast and/or amused an infamous scene from The Paperboy that shows Nicole Kidman urinating on Zac Efron; this is apparently a great salve for jellyfish burns which were covering our Ken Doll-like protagonist. (In fact the term protagonist should be used very loosely for Efron's character Jack who is mostly acted upon than active throughout.)
Lurid! Sexy! Perverse! Trashy! Whether or not it's actually effective is overshadowed by all the hubbub that's attached itself to the movie for better or worse. In fact the movie is all of these things — but that's actually not a compliment. What could have become somethingmemorable is jaw-droppingly bad (when it's not hilarious). Director Lee Daniels uses a few different visual styles throughout from a stark black and white palette for a crime scene recreation at the beginning to a '70s porno aesthetic that oscillates between psychedelic and straight-up sweaty with an emphasis on Efron's tighty-whiteys. This only enhances the sloppiness of the script which uses lines like narrator/housekeeper/nanny Anita's (Macy Gray) "You ain't tired enough to be retired " to conjure up the down-home wisdom of the South. Despite Gray's musical talents she is not a good choice for a narrator or an actor for that matter. In a way — insofar as they're perhaps the only female characters given a chunk of screen time — her foil is Charlotte Bless Nicole Kidman's character. Anita is the mother figure who wears as we see in an early scene control-top pantyhose whereas Charlotte is all clam diggers and Barbie doll make-up. Or as Anita puts it "an oversexed Barbie doll."
The slapdash plot is that Jack's older brother Ward (Matthew McConaughey) comes back to town with his colleague Yardley (David Oyelowo) to investigate the case of a death row criminal named Hillary Van Wetter. Yardley is black and British which seems to confuse many of the people he meets in this backwoods town. Hillary (John Cusack) hidden under a mop of greasy black hair) is a slack-jawed yokel who could care less if he's going to be killed for a crime he might or might not have committed. He is way more interested in his bride-to-be Charlotte who has fallen in love with him through letters — this is her thing apparently writing letters and falling in love with inmates — and has rushed to help Ward and Yardley free her man. In the meantime we're subjected to at least one simulated sex scene that will haunt your dreams forever. Besides Hillary's shortcomings as a character that could rustle up any sort of empathy the case itself is so boring it begs the question why a respected journalist would be interested enough to pursue it.
The rest of the movie is filled with longing an attempt to place any the story in some sort of social context via class and race even more Zac Efron's underwear sexual violence alligator innards swamp people in comically ramshackle homes and a glimpse of one glistening McConaughey 'tock. Harmony Korine called and he wants his Gummo back.
It's probably tantalizing for this cast to take on "serious" "edgy" work by an Oscar-nominated director. Cusack ditched his boombox blasting "In Your Eyes" long ago and Efron's been trying to shed his squeaky clean image for so long that he finally dropped a condom on the red carpet for The Lorax so we'd know he's not smooth like a Ken doll despite how he was filmed by Daniels. On the other hand Nicole Kidman has been making interesting and varied career choices for years so it's confounding why she'd be interested in a one-dimensional character like Charlotte. McConaughey's on a roll and like the rest of the cast he's got plenty of interesting projects worth watching so this probably won't slow him down. Even Daniels is already shooting a new film The Butler as we can see from Oprah's dazzling Instagram feed. It's as if they all want to put The Paperboy behind them as soon as possible. It's hard to blame them.